Beverley Hughes: On 8 October 2007 the Minister of State for Justice, my right hon. Friend the Member for Delyn (Mr. Hanson), and I announced the appointment of Andrew Williamson CBE and Peter Smallridge CBE as independent co-chairs of the review of restraint in juvenile secure settings. The Ministry of Justice and the Department for Children, Schools and Families have joint responsibility for the review.
	I am pleased to announce that the chairs reported their recommendations to my my right hon. Friend and I on 20 June. We welcome their report and will give its recommendations careful consideration. We intend to publish the chairs' full report alongside our response to its recommendations by the end of October.

John Healey: I have today published a consultation paper and draft regulatory impact assessment to seek views on the use of the 'contractor's method of valuation' in non-domestic rating valuations in England for the 2010 revaluation.
	Rateable values are assessed independently by the Valuation Office Agency and are generally based on annual rental values. Most are assessed having regard to actual rents but such evidence is not always available. In about 11 per cent. of cases, rateable value is based on capital values—found from the cost of construction and land values— which is then 'decapitalised' to give an annual value representing the rateable value. This is called the 'contractor's method of valuation'. The decapitalisation rate used in the valuation is prescribed by the Government.
	The consultation paper I have published today contains proposals:
	to continue to prescribe the decapitalisation rate for the 2010 revaluation;
	to retain the existing groupings of properties subject to each of the two decapitalisation rates; and
	on the methodology to be used to determine the decapitalisation rates.
	We will make final decisions on these proposals and, in the event of continued prescription, determine the decapitalisation rates in the autumn of this year in light of the consultation responses.
	Copies of the document have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses, and can be accessed via the Communities and Local Government website at: http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/local government/decapitalisationrate

Hilary Benn: I and my hon. Friend the Minister for Marine, Landscape and Rural Affairs, the Member for Chatham and Aylesford (Jonathan Shaw), will be representing the United Kingdom at this month's Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Luxembourg. The three devolved Administration Ministers Richard Lochead, Elin Jones and Michelle Gildernew will also be attending.
	There is only one substantive item for discussion on this month's agenda relating to agriculture, which concerns the common agricultural policy health check. The codecision proposal updating the rules on placing plant protection products on the market will be adopted by the Council without need for further discussion (as an 'A' point).
	A revision of the 2004 cotton reforms will also be adopted as an 'A' point. We shall be voting against this proposal which we feel is insufficiently ambitious at a time of further CAP reform.
	With regard to fisheries, the Council is due to agree the proposal on illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing. A further proposal for fishing authorisations is also due to be agreed. In addition, there will be a discussion on the Mauritania fishery agreement but no adoption as the opinion of the European Parliament is still awaited.
	The following issues will be raised under any other business:
	The Agriculture Commissioner will provide the usual update on the WTO-DDA negotiations.
	France will be tabling a memorandum for higher standards for imports of food products into the EU.
	Belgium will be raising four issues relating to the high price of animal feed, the state aid de minimis rules, BSE testing and bluetongue.
	Latvia will be tabling a point on border veterinary controls.
	The Presidency will present an introductory paper and there will be a substantive paper agreed by France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece and Malta for discussion on the effects of fuel price increases on the fishing industry.

"Review of Women with Particular Vulnerabilities in the Criminal Justice System" (Government Response)

Maria Eagle: On 6 December 2007 the Minister of State for Justice, my right hon. Friend the Member for Delyn (Mr. Hanson), published a Command Paper—"The Government's Response to the Report by Baroness Corston of a Review of Women with Particular Vulnerabilities in the Criminal Justice System" (Cm 7261).
	The paper detailed how the Government planned to respond to the 43 recommendations made by my right hon. and noble Friend Baroness Corston in her report. I am today updating Parliament and publishing a report on progress made over the last six months in taking forward the Government's response, detailing the Government's continued commitment to bring about real improvements for women offenders in both custody and the community. I have placed copies of the progress report in the Libraries of both Houses. Copies are also available in the Vote Office and the Printed Paper Office. Copies are also available on the internet at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/announcement240608b.htm
	Since being appointed as the Ministerial Champion For Women and Criminal Justice matters, I am pleased to report the significant actions which we have been able to deliver against the commitments made in the Government's response.
	In respect of the recommendation that the number of strip searches in women's prisons be reduced, it has been usual practice for women prisoners to be strip searched on leaving and entering prison. This can be intimidating and distressing, particularly for women who have experienced domestic violence or sexual abuse. Pilots are now running in five women's prisons testing a new kind of search which does not require the removal of underwear unless there is intelligence or suspicion at any stage that an item is concealed in the underwear. The pilots are going well and the impact of the new model Women's Full Search is now being evaluated. The early results are encouraging and I am confident that new arrangements will shortly be in place in all women's prisons.
	The Ministry of Justice will issue guidance to probation areas on making greater use of capacity in the current female approved premises. Areas will be encouraged to consider placing more women in them, who may not necessarily present a high risk of harm to others, but who could benefit from the supervised, structured environment and the support that an approved premises can provide. I expect this guidance will be issued in July 2008.
	A site in Bristol has been identified for piloting an integrated approach providing access to a range of community based services and residential facilities. The target group will be women involved in the Criminal Justice System, particularly those who may have a range of vulnerabilities or who may be at risk of ending up in custody. The project will be delivered in partnership with other agencies.
	The Ministry of Justice has supported financially the establishment and continued development of the women's Turnaround Project in Wales. The project clearly demonstrates the value of multi-agency, multi-sector work and has rapidly achieved an excellent reputation for working with women offenders and women at risk of offending.
	The Ministry of Justice is looking at diverting women offenders from custody into community provision where that is appropriate. Above and beyond Baroness Corston's recommendations more proactive steps need to be taken to reduce the number of women going into custody unnecessarily. Options will be developed over the coming months to create a deliverable plan of action to achieve this.
	The Government aim to make better use of the conditional cautioning scheme for women as an alternative to court proceedings. National roll-out of this scheme has just been completed and provides offenders who have admitted committing a low-level offence the opportunity to be diverted from court by accepting a caution with conditions. Consideration is being given to testing out a rehabilitative condition for women as part of their caution. In this instance, the main condition will be to attend a women's centre for assessment. This will link with the Together Women Programme sites to test the benefit of combining a caution with access to the supportive wrap around services available.
	A short project was set up to consider the recommendation advocating small custodial units for 20 to 30 women. The Government accept the principles Baroness Corston developed, but the findings of the project identified significant issues that suggest standalone units of that size are neither feasible nor desirable. In addition, it would not be possible to deliver the range of services required to meet the full range of women's specific needs. The design of a new 77-place wing at HMP Bronzefield (due for completion in 2009) will provide an opportunity to implement, test and embed a new approach to the physical environment and delivery of regimes that could test out these principles.
	The Ministry of Justice "Gender Equality Scheme" was published on 1 April 2008. The scheme sets out what is being done to promote gender equality and eliminate unlawful discrimination and harassment in all our business areas, decisions and activities. The principles in the "Gender Equality Scheme" underpin everything we do as a Department and will ensure fair and equal treatment for all.
	On 30 May 2008 the Ministry of Justice published a "National Service Framework for Women Offenders". The framework clearly lays out the Government's strategy for addressing the needs of women offenders, and represents a significant step forward in the Government's efforts to make the delivery of Baroness Corston's recommendations a reality.
	On 30 May 2008 the Ministry of Justice also published the "Offender Management Guide to Working with Women". The guide details some of the issues, challenges, and opportunities that need to be considered when working with women offenders at all stages of the offender process, including the importance of promoting and developing community-based alternatives to custody.
	The Prison Service has introduced a set of gender-specific standards for women's prisons. The standards, which were published on 28 April 2008 in a new Prison Service Order (4800), will ensure that prisons provide regimes, programmes and support that are sensitive and appropriate for women.
	A cross-Departmental Criminal Justice women's unit has been established with a senior civil servant appointed to head up the unit. This will manage and co-ordinate the work on Corston across all relevant Departments.
	The Inter-Ministerial Group (IMG) on reducing reoffending now provides overall governance, ensuring cross-Departmental commitment to the actions required. I have convened a sub-group to the IMG to drive the work forward and monitor progress against our commitments. Members include the Solicitor-General and Ministers from the Government Equalities Office, Department of Health, Department for Innovation Universities and Skills, Department for Communities and Local Government, and the Home Office.
	Another key commitment is to improve health and social care services for women in contact with the Criminal Justice System. Health-related commissioning guidance specifically focused on services for women and their families will be developed by December 2008. The Government will also have reviewed and set out recommendations for improvements in the health care provided to women in police custody, in court cells and during transportation to prison.
	I would like to thank my ministerial colleagues and officials in their Departments who have contributed to the progress made and I look forward to continuing working with them, and our non-Government stakeholders, in taking forward these commitments further. As the Ministerial Champion for Women and Criminal Justice matters, I will continue to make sure that everything possible is done to ensure that we have a system that is properly responsive to the needs and characteristics of women.

Consultation on Weekend Voting

Appointments to the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland

Des Browne: In seeking to ensure that the events that led to spoiling of a significant number of ballot papers in the election to the Scottish Parliament in 2007 do not happen again, my overriding priority has been to put the interests of the voter first.
	On 23 October last year, Ron Gould reported on his review of the 2007 Scottish elections. I said to Parliament then that the Gould report was a valuable contribution to the analysis of what went wrong last May, and I gave a commitment to provide a full response to the report once I had heard the views of a wide range of interests through consultation and debate. The Scotland Office initiated that consultation through our paper, "Sorting the Ballot". Meetings were held with electoral administrators, political parties and the Electoral Commission to hear their views on Gould's recommendations. In addition, a number of focus groups were held with voters across Scotland. I also welcomed the move from the Scottish Affairs Committee to conduct their own review of the Gould report and its recommendations. The Committee reported on 18 May and its recommendations have been taken into account when considering the Government's response. I shall be responding separately to the Committee's report later today.
	Last October, I commended the Gould report to the House. It offered proposals to all stakeholders involved in the administration of elections in Scotland. Proposals that aim to improve the way in which Scottish elections are administered and suggest good practices which could inform the running of other elections in the UK. It is my view that all political parties should work together to build on the proposals in the Gould report in order to improve the election process in Scotland. Elections belong to the people not individual political parties, and that is why we must work for consensus across the board and to ensure that the Scottish voter is put first.
	One of the most important steps to put the needs of the voter first is the decoupling of the local government from the Scottish Parliament elections. The decision to combine the elections was taken by the Scottish Parliament. Decoupling will go a long way to delivering the simplicity and clarity that Ron Gould has identified as being needed for elections taking place in Scotland. After the May 2007 elections, when voters were asked by an independent researcher to choose the top priority for the next election, the most popular option was having the Scottish Parliament and local government elections on separate days. This was confirmed by the focus groups referred to above, where the most frequently heard comments asked why there were two elections using different processes on the same day and why couldn't they be held on different days. Responsibility for Scottish local authority elections rests with the Scottish Executive. I therefore welcome the Scottish Executive's consultation, which was launched on 3 March, on how they might decouple the local government elections from the Parliament elections. It will benefit all those involved with elections if this proceeds.
	In my statement to the House last October, I accepted outright five recommendations which, in my view, could make a significant improvement to the running of elections to the Scottish Parliament. These were: a reversion to manual counting; separate ballot papers for the constituency and regional votes; a longer period between close of nominations and the date of election; a six month cut-off for changes in the law governing the conduct of elections; and consolidation of the legislation on the conduct of Scottish Parliament elections. I am pleased to say that the results of our consultation confirm that these five recommendations have overwhelming support. I would like now to set out my response to the other Gould recommendations on which we consulted.
	First, on ballot paper design, the Government accept the Gould recommendation that registered party names should appear first on the regional ballot paper, followed by party description. It is important that voters know which party it is that they are voting for and that they know they are voting for a party rather than an individual in the regional vote. The focus groups in particular highlighted that voters prefer the certainty of the registered party names which are less liable to change than the party descriptors.
	While we respect the intention of Gould's further recommendation that ballot paper ordering should be determined by lottery, a strong case has been made against such a move on the grounds of voter confusion, particularly for those with learning difficulties. There was strong support amongst the focus groups and others consulted for retaining alphabetical order on the grounds that that is what people are used to and it is easier to find the candidate or party of the voter's choice.
	On the timing of the count, I have decided that there should be no change from the current arrangements—that is, that the count should take place as soon as practicable after the polls close. There was no direct link between the timing of the count and the problems that occurred last May. Convention is that the count takes place overnight as the ballot boxes come in and, as the focus groups showed, voters enjoy the experience of hearing the results as soon as possible. Voters and candidates should wait no longer to know the results than is necessary to count the ballot papers and verify the result. The final decision on when it is practicable that the count should take place, given local circumstances, though, will remain a matter for individual returning officers.
	I have considered the question of whether a chief returning officer (CRO) should be appointed with full responsibility for administering all elections. The Gould report sets out a range of functions that a CRO might fulfil. However the views that have been expressed across the political spectrum and by administrators are not conclusive. A considered examination of the structures required for administering elections in Scotland is necessary, and I note that the Electoral Commission has taken the initiative in leading on an investigation on this subject and their report is expected later this summer. The Scottish Executive has also indicated that they propose to consult on the detailed options for a CRO for local authority elections later this year. Given the need to ensure a consistent approach across elections in the potential role of a CRO, and the ongoing consideration that is being given to this issue I have decided that the Government should work closely with colleagues across Government, the Electoral Commission and the Scottish Executive in examining this in more detail before a final decision is reached.
	This will take time, as any change would require primary and secondary legislation. I am very conscious of the need to make decisions now for the elections in 2011 so that there is no uncertainty about how these elections will be run. I am also conscious of the need for a period of stability in order to rebuild confidence in our electoral processes. I do not think it practical therefore to make decisions on a CRO to enable such a person to be in place for the 2011 election. That is not to rule out the concept, but rather to ensure sufficient time is available to give the matter the consideration it deserves.
	The recommendations that we have already accepted, together with the proposed decoupling of elections, will address the issues of accountability that underpinned the reasons why Gould recommended a CRO. These steps will ensure there is greater clarity in the election process. I accept the recommendation of the all-party Scottish Affairs Select Committee that there is no compelling case to change the present legislative arrangements for elections to the Scottish Parliament. However, accepting Gould's view that co-ordination of elections can be improved, I propose to establish, on a non-statutory basis, an elections policy and planning group for the Scottish Parliament elections in 2011. This group, chaired, for the first time, by a senior returning officer, will report to me on a regular basis on progress with the commitments that I have set out today.
	Gould also raised commonly voiced concerns about consistency and professionalism amongst electoral administrators. This, to a large degree, is being addressed by the work of the Electoral Commission in developing performance standards. As this is a new monitoring regime for electoral administrators, once it has been introduced we will need to give it time to establish itself, before reviewing whether any further action is required.
	By the end of this year, as Gould recommended, work will have begun on consolidating the legislation that governs the Scottish Parliament elections into a single statutory instrument; we have committed to achieving this at least six months before the 2011 elections are held.
	Our key task now is to rebuild the confidence of voters in casting their vote. The steps I have set out today are, I believe, the right ones to take to ensure that the problems of the 2007 election never happen again.